One of the hot-button topics in UU ministry is how ministers might receive continuing guidance after full fellowship. This is almost immediately interpreted as 'evaluation', connecting as a tense band of anxiety directly to MFC Rule 24, which describes under what conditions a minister's fellowship might be terminated. I wonder if there is another way this might be approached.
I just talked with one of the professional chaplains at the hospital, and he described a most wonderful experience with the peer review process that is required of professional chaplains. This is a new process: the Association of Professional Chaplains recently began to require these reviews. Basically, every five years, a chaplain puts together a group of three or more peers for a review. The chaplain meets with them and presents to them for an hour and a half or so. This presentation is like a Quaker 'clearing committee', in which the presenter directs the discussion, and the peers ask leading questions, helping the presenter come to better self understanding of career or related issues.
I wonder if we UU ministers, who often operate so independently, might learn something from a model like this. Perhaps we can learn to give and receive feedback in a supportive way, without heaviness of evaluation pulling us all down. Certainly we all deal with enough evaluation in other areas of our ministry!
Monday, December 22, 2008
Sunday, December 07, 2008
Excellence in Ministry
Christine Robinson over at iMinister has been blogging in preparation for the Excellence in Ministry conference, where she will serve as the official blogger. Some of her initial posts have generated lots of interesting comments. It's hard for me, just over a year out from my visit with the MFC, not to add my thoughts.
Going through the fellowship process wasn't easy. We're not the only denomination that has such a process. I'm watching a friend do the dance of angst as she seeks ordination with the Presbyterians. Their process seems to be more like a bar exam than a dissertation defense, with a battery of written tests that less than half pass on the first try, according to Carol Howard Merritt at Tribal Church. But the Presbyterians face the same question we do: does the process do a fair and effective job of identifying those who will be successful ministers? Or does the denomination instead end up "Saying goodbye to our seminarians, letting them work at Starbucks, while forty percent of our congregations flounder, without pastors?", as Carol puts it. I understand this is true of other mainline denominations, too.
We UUs have been blessed with more ministers than parish positions. The denomination, and individual churches, could be selective. But times are changing. At the GA Presidential Candidates Forum in June, Peter Morales said, "we are going to lose half our ministry during the next presidency. Three out of eight of our ministers are 58 years of age or older." My fear is that as they leave, our congregations will flounder, too, in a typically unique UU twilight zone that is neither lay-led fellowship nor professionally ministered church.
I think of another friend who was happily pursuing ministry as a Licensed Local Pastor in her Methodist congregation. This is a specialized ministry, for a person who intended to serve a specific church. The requirements are less strenuous than ordained ministry; and the expectations of ministry are more narrowly defined. Perhaps this model, or deacons, or some other paraprofessional level of ministry might make sense. Perhaps the path to professional ministry might involve intermediate steps in which the candidate both performs ministry and is paid for it.
We have been bold before. Our lay-led fellowships were a model of church in which no minister is present. They have their places. Can we invent a model of ministry that serves our smaller churches that do want some form of professional ministry? Can we invent a model of ministry that makes new church planting a possibility? Can we invent a model of ministry that engages our most committed laypeople in new levels of engagement and service?
Going through the fellowship process wasn't easy. We're not the only denomination that has such a process. I'm watching a friend do the dance of angst as she seeks ordination with the Presbyterians. Their process seems to be more like a bar exam than a dissertation defense, with a battery of written tests that less than half pass on the first try, according to Carol Howard Merritt at Tribal Church. But the Presbyterians face the same question we do: does the process do a fair and effective job of identifying those who will be successful ministers? Or does the denomination instead end up "Saying goodbye to our seminarians, letting them work at Starbucks, while forty percent of our congregations flounder, without pastors?", as Carol puts it. I understand this is true of other mainline denominations, too.
We UUs have been blessed with more ministers than parish positions. The denomination, and individual churches, could be selective. But times are changing. At the GA Presidential Candidates Forum in June, Peter Morales said, "we are going to lose half our ministry during the next presidency. Three out of eight of our ministers are 58 years of age or older." My fear is that as they leave, our congregations will flounder, too, in a typically unique UU twilight zone that is neither lay-led fellowship nor professionally ministered church.
I think of another friend who was happily pursuing ministry as a Licensed Local Pastor in her Methodist congregation. This is a specialized ministry, for a person who intended to serve a specific church. The requirements are less strenuous than ordained ministry; and the expectations of ministry are more narrowly defined. Perhaps this model, or deacons, or some other paraprofessional level of ministry might make sense. Perhaps the path to professional ministry might involve intermediate steps in which the candidate both performs ministry and is paid for it.
We have been bold before. Our lay-led fellowships were a model of church in which no minister is present. They have their places. Can we invent a model of ministry that serves our smaller churches that do want some form of professional ministry? Can we invent a model of ministry that makes new church planting a possibility? Can we invent a model of ministry that engages our most committed laypeople in new levels of engagement and service?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
